Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Fueki.4753

Members
  • Posts

    7,728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Fueki.4753

  1. 27 minutes ago, Nash.2681 said:

    Not saying it is forbidden to play on weekends, to each their own. I was just refering to Lumpin Jumpix bold claim that the game is dead because he doesn't find people to raid on what he considers "prime time" (number of raid squads on friday/saturday evening is more likely smaller because people either have already done their full clear or doing RL stuff since it's the weekend). Apparently his and Sobx's posts got removed, so what I wrote is pretty much out of context now.

    When else do you think is "prime time"?

    Sunday to Thursday evening, when people have to prepare for the next workday and go to bed early? Friday and Saturday are pretty much the best evenings to play games.

    Why else do you think many families choose these evenings for their family activities? It's for the same reasons why it's also a the best time for playing video games.

    But that's assuming one even has a job.

    • Confused 3
  2. 1 hour ago, Ilusenn.6420 said:

    I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the forum, can the confused person explain what's confusing? English isn't my native language, I probably made a few mistakes.

    Most of the time, people use the confused marker as a dislike button, because the forum doesn't feature and actual dislike button.

    So, rather than someone not understanding your idea, you should think of it as someone not liking your idea.

  3. 2 hours ago, Nash.2681 said:

    How on earth can someone think friday/saturday 8 p.m. is primetime for any gaming? In my world, that's the time when you start enjoying your weekend with your friends and/or family. Regulary gaming at that time seems rather weird to me

    Playing games is EXACTLY how many people start enjoying their weekend. Not everyone is a family person.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
    • Confused 1
  4. 1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

    Last I played WoW I did get bored of PvE and hopped into a battlground. It was full so that was nice. And it consisted of me, I think maybe another player and the rest was bots running in a straight line after each other. 

    I've seen players lose against the AI enemy parties during the Island Expeditions in Battle for Azeroth, so never over-estimate player capabilities.

  5. 12 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

    Warcryier

    Mechanism: Bursts are replaced by Outburst.

    Outburst: Use all your adrenaline to launch a shout that blast damage to the surrounding foes for each strike of adrenaline used. CD: 8s.

    Utilities: Echoes: A set of utility skills that apply a buff for 5 seconds on the character. This buff grant an effect similar to thief's venoms everytime you lauch an outburst or are affected by a shout. The duration of the buff is extended everytime you are affected by an outburst.

    Wouldn't Warcrier without y be better?

    I still think they should just give us Paragon though.

    The elite specialization mechanic could be Echoes. Activating an Echo would slowly drain our adrenaline while granting a bonus for the duration it drains the Adrenaline (this would be similar to Herald's Facets).  They could give us three or five of them, so that we have a good mixture of situational choices and general benefits.

    Just like in GW1, there could be additional bonuses when triggering Chants while an Echo is active.

    The utilities would be Chants. Just like in GW1, Chants have a set duration, empower one specific action (per party member) and end when triggered by said action.

  6. 12 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

    What I also don't understand is that your only theory in this thread is that a group of players keep going out of their way to not even profit from taking your instance but instead to intentionally... just kick you out of it? And that's what they're camping lfg for? It is possible, sure, but it's not exactly... probable. I'd say it's even less probable that an action would be taken on it, considering multiple scenarios that could cause players to join/merge and subsequently leave the group without an intention to troll you or anyone else.
    In other words: I'd rather focus on problematic/buggy mechanics, like lack of party ownership and ability to merge groups without any confirmation.

    While it doesn't happen all that often, there are people who enjoy abusing game mechanics and bugs to troll and/or grieve other players. I've had it happen multiple times to me as well.

    People camping the LFG to intentionally and repeatedly de-list parties and Thieves stealthing their own team members in sPvP to prevent point capture are just two examples of things I encountered.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
    • Confused 4
  7. 6 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

    Oh, now I get it. Is that how it works though? Never saw that happening and in that case I think it's that interaction (if it really is what's being described here) what should be fixed.

    Does this work in other content than SAB?

    I don't think it's intended game design, but occasionally it happens.

    It's probably just one of the many things that will never get fixed, like that one missing cornerstone in WvW or the events that just stop working.

    I remember that it happened to me on rare occasions, too, and I have never touched SAB (outside of that one story instance in season 3).

     

    • Like 1
    • Confused 2
  8. 3 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

    Does OP feel the need to report players who join his party? Or the ones who abuse the kick mechanic and actually kick him? Pretty sure it's the second one. Which is exactly what leaves the clickable nicknames in chat. I actually don't understand what point -or practical usage- you're trying to go for here?

    The way I read it, is that the process of merging the parties is what forced him out of his instance, not manually being kicked by other players. In this case, there'd be no name in chat. That's why the want is specifically to have joining players to also appearin chat.

    It's not hard to understand:

    player joins party -> the game removes you from your instance -> player leaves party while you are on a loading screen

    In this scenario, no manual kick was initiated, so no name will appear in chat.

     

    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
  9. 11 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

    Nicknames of players who voted to kick are already right-clickable in chat and include a report option, so once again I don't see the point being made. What am I missing?

    This thread is specifically about seeing the names of people who join parties or merge parties. This are not displayed in chat.

    And if someone joins you, causes you to get kicked out of your instance and leaves the party before you have a chance to check their name, then you have no name to report. At least I assume that's what happened.

    • Like 3
    • Confused 3
  10. Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

    I'd think if he wanted to report it with any chance of an action being taken, he'd probably need to provide more than just a nickname anyways? Like a recording, for example.

    Of course, being able to right-click names in chat and report them is not guaranteed to have any noticeable effect.

    But there are people who like being able to report anyway.

    • Confused 2
  11. 6 hours ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    I think removing the relevant CD would mean that the icon and particle effects are no longer needed.

    But that doesn't mean those would be removed as well, unless specifically pointed out.

  12. 12 hours ago, Frozey.8513 said:

    Lastly coming from the original Guild Wars you would have imagined Ranger to be clear option for people who want ranged game play,

    In GW1, I've seen more melee players using bows to simply pull enemies, than I've seen Rangers indulging in ranged gameplay.

    It wasn't rare for Rangers to use Warrior, Assassin or Dervish as their secondary profession and play melee builds. Toucher also was a fairly popular melee Ranger build.

    Don't forget, the range in Ranger means something different than the range in ranged combat.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 4
    • Confused 1
×
×
  • Create New...